A law that enables

The National Advisory Council’s suggestions for strengthening the draft law on the Rights of Persons With Disabilities (PWD) is a potentially far-reaching intervention. The step is in sync with the recent notification of a separate Department for Disabilities in the Union Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment, which was announced in the President’s 2012 address to Parliament. Ever since India ratified the United Nations Convention on the rights of PWDs in 2007, the formulation of a comprehensive law became imperative and these two developments suggest things are finally moving ahead. Currently, there are four separate pieces of legislation pertaining to India’s disabled population.

The earliest, the 1987 Mental Health Act, predates the discourse on affirmative action for the disabled in India and, to that extent, the status of mental illness as a disability remains ambiguous. Then, there is a separate law that deals with the creation of qualified and trained personnel for the provision of rehabilitation and education services for this segment of the population. The third, the PWD Act of 1995, is underpinned by an emphasis on anti-discrimination and guarantees of equal opportunities. Although the latter was envisaged as a comprehensive law, it did not address fully the conditions of persons with other equally severe disabling conditions. Hence the 1999 Act for people with autism, cerebral palsy, mental retardation and multiple disabilities.

It is hardly surprising that these four laws in themselves have not mitigated the sense of apathy and bureaucratic red tape that hamper the creation of an enabling environment. The mechanisms and procedures involved are riddled with duplication and inconsistencies, as evidenced by the evolving case law over questions of jurisdiction and interpretation of different laws. More than a billion people around the world experience one or another form of disability, according to the World Health Organisation and World Bank 2011 report. On other estimates, about 10 per cent of the population in developing countries is disabled. By any reckoning, India’s numbers would be much larger than what governments are prepared to acknowledge, given the detrimental influences of poverty, illiteracy and poor health on disability. It follows that stepping up investments in health and education is one of the important ways of preventing disabilities and mitigating their impact over the long term.

Requiring service providers to furnish a declaration of conformity with the relevant laws is the other means to ensure accountability and effective enforcement. An umbrella legislation will go a long way in altering the present state of affairs.

The Hindu

Indian websites a closed window

Mahima Sikand | TNN

Mumbai: The internet has been perceived as a levelling field of sorts, but for millions of Indians with visual and hearing disabilities, it is just another level of discrimination.

When it comes to being disabled-friendly, Indian websites are one of the worst in the world—more than 99% of them do not adhere to guidelines outlined by the World Wide Web Consortium in 1999. Known as the W3C access guidelines (W3CAG), these list out the criteria to make websites accessible to all users. Prominent among them is the need to provide “text equivalents”—text, the guideline says, can be output to speech synthesizers and Braille displays. Only one government website, of the ministry of social justice and welfare, can be accessed by a visually handicapped person. More than 5,000 other government portals and thousands of other private websites don’t measure up. In 2009, the government had assured activists that it would revamp 50 websites within months to conform to the W3C access guidelines.

Two years later, the promise remains unfulfilled, even as new websites are being created every day. Javed Abidi, director of the National Centre for Promotion of Employment for Disabled People (NCPEDP), is furious over the government’s inaction but blames private players equally. “The web remains a very unfair platform for its exclusionary approach. Our software designers sitting in Hyderabad and Bangalore design foreign websites that are in keeping with the accessibility guidelines. But when these same people make websites for India, they fail to incorporate adequate design changes. This is just because no one in India cares,” he says.

Ramneek Keshwani is a first generation entrepreneur from Pune who lost his eyesight in an accident when he was 12. “I have never been able to benefit from the internet revolution because I cannot access any of these websites. I am still dependent on someone else to do my work. Isn’t my requirement actually greater than any able-bodied person,” asks Keshwani.

Times of India

Govt slow to clear hurdles in making city disabled-friendly Despite Law, Little Effort Made To Make Buildings, Buses, Trains Accessible

Mahima Sikand | TNN

Well-meaning laws have seldom changed the ground reality in India, and when it comes to disability legislations, things are no different. Despite a legal mandate to create friendlier infrastructure for the country’s 70 million people with disabilities, governments have done precious little. In Mumbai too, the design reform has been painfully slow in the coming.

Activists claim that almost all government buildings in the city disregard the needs of people with disabilities. ADAPT, a group working on accessibility rights for disabled people, conducted an audit of government buildings and facilities and discovered shocking lapses everywhere.

The Bombay high court did not have a disabled-friendly toilet until 2005, when some orthopedically challenged litigants brought the issue to its attention. Barring a few big names like JJ Hospital, most government hospitals do not have ramps at the entrance or elevators inside. And those that do have elevators do not have Braille buttons in them for visually impaired people. There are less than a dozen disabled-friendly public toilets in the city. The law requires audio-visual traffic signals for the benefit of blind and deaf people; yet, only the signal outside the office of the National Association of the Blind in Worli has the facility.

“When the government is flouting all regulations, it obviously has no right to expect private players to toe the line,” says Dr Anita Prabhu, co-chair of ADAPT.

No wonder, then, that the buildings that have come up over the last 15 years do not conform to the law. “It is understandably difficult to modify existing structures but what is the excuse for the constructions that have come up after 1995, when guidelines were legally mandated,” says Nilesh Singit, a disability rights activist.

Activists point out that the inability to commute is the biggest handicap for a physically challenged person, restricting his movement and his potential. “Today, the law requires 3% reservations for people with disabilities. But, even if someone gets a job, can he truly manage it if travelling to the workplace is such a challenge,” says Javed Abidi, a disability rights activist and director of the National Centre for Promotion of Employment for Disabled People (NCPEDP).

In 2009, hearing a PIL, the Bombay high court directed Central Railway and Western Railway to work out ways to make stations and trains accessible to people with disabilities. Two years later, barring a few major stations, most do not even have basic ramps. “Despite the court order, it is still impossible for a disabled person to travel by a local,” says Nilesh Singit, one of the litigants in the case.

Most railway stations in the city have over-bridges to enter and to travel between platforms, which make them inaccessible for wheelchair users. Even if the platform is somehow reached, it is impossible to board a train because of the difference in level and because of the gap between the platform and the train. “The authorities need to flush the trains with the platforms. This is a difficult task since different stations are of different height, but this is where planning would help. The Delhi Metro is a good example. Sadly, even the newer stations in Mumbai have no provisions for the physically challenged,” says Prabhu.

Even buses score dismally in this regard. In 2003, the BEST acquired 30 buses, which it claimed were disabled-friendly. Today, only a few of these are running. “When we were conducting an audit of BEST buses, so many of my colleagues who are disabled told me that it was the first time they had entered a bus. Almost no one in a wheelchair has ever travelled in a local train. That’s how bad the situation is,” says Prabhu.

Clearings Access

Under the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995, the government and local authorities must

• Install auditory signals at traffic signals on public roads for visually handicapped people
• Create curb cuts and slopes on pavements for easy access of wheelchair users
• Engraving on zebra crossings for the blind and for people with low vision Have Braille symbols and auditory signals in elevators Engraving on the edges of railway platforms for the blind and for people with low vision
• Devise appropriate symbols of disability Install warning signals at appropriate places
• Build ramps in public buildings
• Adapt toilets for wheelchair users

Times Of India, Bombay

"Why two different Bills on mental Health?"

Disability rights groups are up in arms against the divergent views being taken by the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare and the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment on the rights of persons with disabilities.

As per the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, ratified by India, all human beings are presumed to have legal capacities. However, while the new Persons with Disabilities Act, 2011 under the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment propagates the concept of “full legal capacity” of persons with disabilities as per the Convention, the draft of the Mental Health Care Act, 2010 being piloted by the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare goes against the tenets of the UNCRPD.

“As someone explained to me the other day, the old Mental Health Act could forcibly cage people in a mental asylum for up to 90 days; whereas the new draft envisages caging people for up to 30 days. And, the signature of two psychiatrists is enough to make that happen,” says Javed Abidi, Director, National Centre for Promotion of Employment for Disabled People.

Wondering why there was a need to have two different laws as mental health was covered in the draft Persons with Disabilities Act, Mr. Abidi told The Hindu that the two views were diagrammatically opposite. “So, which view will ultimately prevail? What is Government of India’s position on legal capacity and the rights of people living with mental illness? The time has come to settle this extremely complex and yet critical matter,” he said, adding that he had brought this to the attention of the Union Social Justice and Empowerment Minister Mukul Wasnik.

“Logically, this should have been settled long ago. That is why we have been saying that the Social Justice and Empowerment Ministry has failed to discuss, debate and settle substantive issues. The non-governmental organisations in whom trust was placed were just too happy in each other’s company, listening to each other’s voices and patting each other’s back. Neither did they listen to people with disabilities, nor did they engage with the bureaucracy,” Mr Abidi said.

Pointing out that there was a huge gap between the positions of the two Ministries, Mr. Abidi said the draft of the Mental Health Care Act had been sent to the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment, but have received no comments have been received so far. “While Ministry of Health and Family Welfare is going ahead with another consultation next week, the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment should attend the meeting and sort out the issues,” Mr. Abidi has suggested to Mr. Wasnik.

The Persons with Disabilities Act grants all legal rights to the differently abled persons to decide even on their treatment, the proposed law drafted by the Health and Family Welfare Ministry categorises persons with mental illness as those who do not need any support or need minimal support and those who do need support.

The Hindu

“You move forward in life with your intellect and thoughts, not with your legs,” Neeta Panchal

I first saw her when she wheeled herself into the coffee shop of the hotel I was staying in Ahmedabad. She and her husband made an interesting sight! People who had come down for dinner stopped in their stride. Her husband on crutches with their baby boy in a sling tied on his chest and she following on her wheelchair. It was endearing, if not anything. And then when she starts talking and you get to know her, you realise she is a bundle of energy with a zeal for disability rights. Her vivaciousness is infectious. Meet Neeta Panchal of Disability Advocacy Group, Gujarat as she shares her story with Dorodi Sharma of D.N.I.S.

D.N.I.S.: You acquired your disability when you were barely 17 years old. Can you tell us about the incident?

Neeta Panchal: It was during the huge earthquake that ravaged Gujarat on Republic Day in 2001. I was 17 years old at that time and was on my way to school along with 7 other girls. Suddenly, the earth shook. Since we stayed very close to the Pakistan border, we thought that it must be a war that had started. Unknowingly, we rushed into a building to escape what we thought was a bombing, only to realise that the whole building was crumbling down on us. My friends died. I was caught between two of them but somehow I survived.

I was trapped in the rubble for more than four hours. When they were pulling me out, I couldn’t feel my legs anymore.

D.N.I.S.: How did you overcome the trauma?

Neeta Panchal: It wasn’t easy. When the doctors kept telling me that I had been badly injured and that I was paralysed waist down, I was still hopeful. I thought I was in a hospital after all and I would get well soon. Finally after spending more than a year there, I realised that this was serious, that I would not be able to walk ever again in my life. It shook me. I went into depression. At that time I was also engaged to be married. When the boy’s family found out that I had become disabled, they broke off the engagement. I tried to commit suicide twice. Luckily, my family rallied on to get me out of that mindset. My brother especially. He showed me Sudha Chandran’s film called ‘Nache Mayuri’ which is her story about being a dancer despite losing one leg. Slowly, I came out of my depression. I realised that if God has saved my life, He probably had a reason.

D.N.I.S.: How did you decide to join the sector?

Neeta Panchal: That happened much later. The earthquake had taken a toll on my family. I lost my sister and grandmother. We lost our house and all our belongings. We had nothing. To top that, my family suddenly had to look after me. I did not want to be a burden. So I started a small shop of imitation jewellery and then moved on to open a P.C.O. By this time, I was friends with my disability. In 2004, I participated in the National Para Games in Bangalore and won a silver medal in wheelchair race. In 2006, I won the gold medal in the same event. It was only after I came to Ahmedabad that I entered the disability sector.

D.N.I.S.: You have a very interesting love story – almost straight out of a romance novel. Please do share how it all began.

Neeta Panchal: Well, Handicap International (H.I.) conducted rehabilitation camps in Kutch after the earthquake – teaching us basic daily activities, etc. I had several surgeries after the earthquake (Neeta has had 22 surgeries till date and calls the operation theatre her ‘home theatre’!). I needed to come to Ahmedabad for one such surgery. I did not know anyone here and my family was also from a very simple background and was not sure about managing things in a big city. I sought H.I.’s help. Parag (Panchal) who works with H.I. was asked to help me. That’s how we met and fell in love in the hospital.

But our families were dead against this match. Parag’s family because I was more severely disabled than him (Parag is orthopaedically impaired because of polio) and mine because they did not know anything about Parag. We went ahead against our families’ wishes and got married in the hospital on May 25, 2006.

D.N.I.S.: Did you families reconcile to this? Were there any problems?

Neeta Panchal: Our families reconciled to our marriage but there were other problems. My in laws’ house was not accessible. Parag walks with the help of crutches and he could move around the house. I am a wheelchair user and there were places within the house which were inaccessible. We had to get a place of our own. We spent all our money on it. There were days when we did not know where the next meal was coming from.

D.N.I.S.: You also have a two year old son. Being a paraplegic, what difficulties did you face during your pregnancy?

Neeta Panchal: Several doctors told me I was crazy to think of conceiving. Finally I went to a doctor in a Government hospital. I told him that he does not need to worry about my decision and asked him to guide me through my pregnancy. I was confident that I could have a baby like any other non-disabled woman. It was not easy though. The delivery was even more difficult. There were some 20 plus doctors in the operation theatre. But inspite of everything, today I am a proud mother.

D.N.I.S.: How did Disability Advocacy Group (D.A.G.) happen?

Neeta Panchal: Parag works at H.I. and I also got involved with a lot of activities that they do. We soon realised that there was no forum for people with disabilities in Gujarat. There were big organisations working for disabled people while the latter were just ‘beneficiaries’. A group of us decided to form a platform which any person with disability can access. That is how the idea of Disability Advocacy Group (D.A.G.) happened. It was established with H.I.’s help and support. It was an informal network for a few years till we finally registered it in 2009. We now have 2,400 members across Gujarat. Everyone at D.A.G. comes in her/his individual capacity. We do not believe in the tag of an organisation. Our only identity at D.A.G. is that we are people with disabilities.

J.L. Nakum of Jamnagar is currently the President and I am its Secretary.

D.N.I.S.: What does an average day in Neeta Panchal’s life look like?

Neeta Panchal: Very ordinary! I have made my entire house accessible. I do all my household chores from cleaning to cooking on my own. D.A.G. does not have an office yet. I do all my D.A.G. related work from home. Doctors keep telling me to slow down – I still have a lot of health issues but then I got to do what I got to do.

D.N.I.S.: Any message for our readers?

Neeta Panchal: I think disability is in one’s mind. I have learnt a lot in the last 10 years. I was a simple girl from a remote part of Gujarat. Today I have participated in so many national and international events and have got to meet so many interesting people. I couldn’t speak anything but Kutchi language earlier, today I speak Hindi and broken English. I have come a long way. Of course, all this would not have been possible without the support of my family, my in laws and my husband. People today look upto me as a role model. What more can I ask? Zindagi me pairon se nahin, dimag se chalna! (You move forward in life with your intellect and thoughts not with your legs.) Everything happens for good.

DNIS

Set up a ministry for disability: Javed Adibi

In an exclusive interview, Javed Adibi director, National Centre for Promotion of Employment for Disabled People (NCPEDP) in India, and the founder of the Disability Rights Group, shares his views on the shape of disability movement in India with BS Manjunath.

Javed has been a wheelchair-user since the age of 15. He is also a successful freelance political journalist and was approached in 1993 by Sonia Gandhi to head the disabilities unit of the newly established Rajeev Gandhi Foundation. His efforts and determination resulted in the passing of India’s Disability Act of 1995, giving legal protection and support to the disabled. Prior to the Act, disabled citizens in India had no legal recourse to demand significant, lasting changes from both the public and private sectors. Among other social protections, the Act provides economic incentives for businesses that hire disabled employees, and allows funding for improved accessibility to public buildings and institutions.

Q. I remember you had conveyed your displeasure about the previous year’s budget to Prime Minister, how do you rate the 2011-12 budget?

Javed Abidi - This year’s budget is a big disappointment to the disabled community.  Lot of promises made during 11th five year plan is not emphasized in the budget such as recognition of sign language, or starting a national centre for universal design. I would say there was no word in this year’s budget on disability. In terms of customer service, accessibility, and concession, even the Railway budget was more disabled friendly. Railway Minister has sanctioned concession for disabled citizens in Rajadani and other fast trains. On the scale of ten, I would give 5 or 6 to the railway budget.

Q. What are the reactions you have received from census commissioners? How do you think the census would help in framing immediate agenda?

Javed Abidi - We have received mixed reactions from the census commissioners, both positive and negative. In Punjab the enumerators did not count the institutionalized children. In other places the enumerator have done and collected all the relevant data. Once the exact number of disabled persons in the country is established, it would help in framing the future agenda and allocation of resources.

Q. On the last World Disability Day you had a silent protest outside India Gate with many demands, are any of them being fulfilled?

Javed Abidi - Our prime demand is to set up a separate ministry for disability. We are awaiting the response from the government.

Q. On the one hand there are genuine organizations that are striving for the welfare of the differently-abled, whereas few years back several NGO’s were black listed under violation of FERA (Foreign Exchange Regulation Act) what are your views on this issue?

Javed Abidi - Social sector is just like any other sector. Though we can’t make any sweeping judgment on this issue, those who are involved should be punished and those who are involved in noble work like advocacy, service should be rewarded.

Q. Once you commented that the disability movement in India has not grown as powerful as dalit movement or any other movement. Don’t you think it’s due to the lack of communication?

Javed Abidi – Firstly the disability is itself one of the crucial factors, and secondly the movement was unorganized. These are the two primary reasons for the disability movement in India for not becoming as vibrant or powerful a movement as other.

Q. Recently Indira Gandhi National Open University (IGNOU) started a course in special education for mainstream teachers. Do you think courses like this will help? Is there shortage of special teachers?

Javed Abidi - I strongly believe in inclusive education. Every drop in the ocean is welcome, if IGNOU, or Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) is starting a special course, they are a welcome step. Coming to second part of your question, there is definitely huge dearth of resources.

BS MANJUNATH | The Sunday Indian

Initial comments and observations on the new draft law

Of late, I have finished taking a quick and cursory look at the new draft law (the working draft as it has been aptly described) which has been updated following conclusion of the last two-day meeting of the new law committee constituted for the purpose of developing a new legislation to replace the existing PWD Act.

I have been receiving any number of telephone calls from friends and activists in the disability sector requesting for my personal and initial views/comments/observations. In view of this, I hereby take this opportunity to share my initial comments/observations/views with three riders: namely, that these views are mine and that they do not necessarily reflect the views of any organization/institution that I may be associated with; That I reserve the right to express further comments/views ETC.; and, that, these views/comments are based, as stated above, on a very quick and cursory reading of the latest working draft and that I need to read the same with greater circumspection, and in greater details.

My immediate and intimate feeling on completing the first quick and cursory reading of the said working draft is that it is not a document speaking for persons with disabilities, it is persons with disabilities speaking for themselves. I wish to whole-heartedly compliment all concerned including my highly esteemed friend Dr. Amita Dhanda under whose active and able guidance her spirited team at Nalsar have put together a brilliant masterpiece of a draft following receipt of inputs from the new law committee. I must also congratulate the Committee chairperson Sudha Kaul and all the members of the committee for the hard work they put in and also for the generosity and cool-headedness demonstrated by them even in the face of all kinds of discombobulations. To my mind, the keenness of the committee and also of the legal consultant in valuing interactive dialogue with the sector is above board.

The depth and intensity of the vision of the working draftcan be better appreciated and felt as one runs through its pages with unqualified openness and unquestionable objectivity.

All this, however, is not at all to suggest that I do not have differences or disagreements at all. Yes, in places, the working draft appears to be overly radical, almost oblivious of ground realities, especially, in respect of  legal capacity to act in relation to persons belonging to certain specific categories of disabilities. Yes, it seems to have become a little too bulky and voluminous, and even unwieldy. Yes, the language and the format perhaps needs fine-tuning in order to ensure that it becomes legally and legalistically more sound.

I would also like to express my satisfaction over the fact that some of my suggestions put forth by me verbally to the person concerned only on the basis of taking a look at  some portions of the first draft brought out on the 20th of the last month have been taken care of in the current draft. These include insertion of a reference to UNCRPD in the Preamble, use of the expression “lifting/eliminating the barriers”,  in place of the expression “lowering the barriers” ETC.

Having said the foregoing, I would like to make the following initial observations/comments in an attempt to facilitate further critical and constructive reflections

• Legal capacity:  I favour the adoption of the minimalist model of legal capacity which, among other things, must recognize all persons with disabilities as persons before the law on an equal basis with others and also recognize legal capacity of persons with disabilities together with provision for support for whosoever needs that support. Such support should only be for the period, and, to the extent needed by the person concerned. Provisions for safeguards against any possible abuse of support and other relevant matters must be duly incorporated. To my mind, complete and explicit elimination of substitutive support in respect of legal capacity to act in relation to persons belonging to certain specific categories of disabilities  may not be fair and proper. Certain specific condition of certain persons may warrant substitutive support. Experience tells us that some persons in some situations or condition may not even be able to nseek support all by themselves. They b need support even to seek support. Provision only for non-substitutive support for all situations and conditions is replete with danger. Imagine a situation assuming that there is absolutely no provision for substitutive support — What happens if a supporting person/network commits a serious lapse resulting in irreparable and substantial loss to the concerned person with disability, and then takes the plea that the decision was his (concerned disabled person’s), and that the supporting person/network was only supporting that concerned disabled person in taking the decision but the ultimate decision was his. Thus, the supporting person/network may get away with impunity.  To my way of thinking, legal capacity has two components, namely, that one is recognized as a person before the law, and that one is presumed to have the ability and the maturity to comprehend the nature and possible consequences of a given action. In a situation of this ilk, one just can’t have the cake and eat it too. Besides, despite absence of criminal intent, how does a person with very profound intellectual/developmental/psychosocial disability accused of an offence  take recourse to the plea of Mens Rea when the full legal capacity to act of such a person is recognized necessarily though unjustly and erroneously implying that he had the ability and maturity to comprehend the nature and possible consequences of the action she/he might be accused of? I feel that each one of us, regardless of ability or disability may need substitutive support as well. Assuming, (not admitting), that I am in a state of coma and the surgeon concerned has to perform on me a critical surgical operation which may prove fatal. Someone close to me has to decide for me. Is this not substitution? If not, what else is? For such and other like reasons, I feel that while there should be explicit provision for making all-out efforts to promote non-substitutive support, substitutive support need not and should not be altogether done away with.
  The UNCRPD also talks about support wherever such support is needed; and support can be both substitutive and non-substitutive; Otherwise, what prevented the framers of the UNCRPD to impose an explicit and  blanket ban on substitutive support? While it is all right to be surcharged with idealism, it would be prudent if the working draft reflects a more judicious combination of idealism and pragmatism.
• Disability Rights Authority (DRA):  The DRA is a very well-conceived concept albeit it needs modifications so as to be in harmony with the contents/views expressed in 1 above. The reason is not far to seek and hence, is not elaborated. After going through the powers, functions and the structure of the proposed DRA with meticulous care, I strongly feel that the proposed DRA must be set up under a separate/exlusive/dedicated statute which may be called “The Disability Rights Authority Act —“. This suggestion is being put forth given the comprehensive nature of DRA’s mandate, its powers and functions, and also its elaborate structure. Please allow me to disabuse the minds of those who feel that the DRA is intended only as a recommendatory bodywith no teeth. My reading of the proposed DRA concept leaves me convinced that it wil have ample powers ample participation of experiential and subject experts, and a number of bodies functioning under its direct supervision, control and guidance.
• Chief Commissioner and state and district Commissions: Please exercise caution and guard against the interchangeable use of the expressions “Commission” and “Commissioner” in relation to the states and districts. Even the corrected/updated draft in one or two places uses these expressions interchangeably. The proposal for a Chief Commissioner at the national level, and Commission at the state and district levels is innovative, imaginative, and it would be interesting to see how it works.
• Education: The chapter on education has been very comprehensively drafted and rightly so. While it justly and emphatically provides for inclusive education at all levels, it also mentions/recognizes the so-called special schools. However the mention/recognition of the so-called special schools has happened only in whispers and not with the kind of emphasis it merits. Therefore, there is a definite and distinct need for explicit provision, among other things, for concurrently creating and promoting more disability specific schools and strengthening the existing ones on modern and scientific lines. Such explicit provision is  necessary despite an already incorporated provision in the working draft in respect of providing education in environments that maximize academic and social development.
  Anyways, we already have exclusive schools in relation to some other non-disability areas which is fair enough as long as one gets quality education; and, assuming for a moment, that we don’t have such exclusive schools for others, nothing should stop us from incorporating what is needed. I feel that since persons with disabilities are recognized as a part of human diversity and humanity, there is little justification for encouraging the use of the expression”special schools”. Instead, we should use the expression “disability specific school”.
• Employment:  I immediately find little scope for commenting on provisions relating to employment as reflected in the working draft. However, I emphatically feel that the justification which merit reservation in promotion for SC and ST communities also applies at least, in equal measure, if not more to persons with disabilities. Hence, it is important to underscore the need for bringing about necessary amendment in the Indian Constitution as was done in the case of SC and ST communities. In some place which I am immediately unable to locate, the working draft while providing for safeguards  states that no person shall be discriminated “merely” on ground of disability implying thereby that disability could be one of the grounds, though not the sole ground of discrimination.  Therefore, Please delete the word “merely” if it still exists in the updated draft. In order to address the concerns of persons who happen to be totally blind, a portion of the reserved quota of jobs should be earmarked for them out of the reserved quota for the blind and the low vision.
• Accessing justice:  Relevant provisions are very well conceived. Just incorporate a strong provision for fast-tracking of all cases at all levels involving persons with disabilities.
• Definitions: Just one thought: This is in relation to the generic definition of persons with disabilities which is almost the same as given in Article 1 of the UNCRPD with the lone exception that the expression “long_term” has not been retained. Will this be prejudicial to the interests of the genuinely disabled?

This definition, and also the defition of “reasonable accommodation” and a number of other provisions leave me convinced that the working draft, in a certain sense, is

way more radical/progressive than even the UNCRPD.

My views in respect of the need for having a more progressive and forward looking common law compared to the current PWD Act and also the need for having additional and specific legislations to address highly specific issues of the more marginalized groups within the larger group of persons with disabilities are so well-known that they perhaps do not merit at least immediate reiteration. Common law to addres commonalities, and specific laws, to address specificities depending on need and necessity is my view. I do not favour the idea of clubbing/merging the existing laws into one Act. To my humble way of thinking, it is so utterly wrong to allege, as some seems to have alleged that the new law committee has violated its mandate. In fact, the new law committee was neither mandated to suggest repral of any laws nor to club and merge all disability specific legislations into only one legislation.

Be that as it may, it would also be in the fitness of things to suggest some amendments in the Indian Constitution to strengther the rights regime for persons with disabilities. Suggestions for such amendments must include amending of Articles 15 and 16 so that disability gets included as one of the prohibited grounds of discrimination. I am aware that suggesting constitutional amendments, strictly speaking, is not within the ambit of the new law committee’s mandate; yet, one perhaps can take this reasonable freedom.

Some more random thoughts: I am not too sure whether insertion of a definition of “barrier” will necessarily work to our advantage. Sometimes, leaving some grey areas is perhaps more advantageous. Some other times, however, it is necessary to define and demystify some expressions. For example, in my view, if any model other than the minimalist model of legal capacity is insisted, then, in my considered view, legal capacity will necessarily have to be defined and demystified.

The working draft is unique in more ways than one. I am particularly impressed by the insertion of principles of implementation and interpretation. The author has made an ingenious attempt to retain the positive jurisprudence which has been built over the years.

To allay the fears expressed by some of our friends, let me state in no uncertain terms that the current workin draft does also adequately address the concerns and aspirations of those persons with disabilities who live in the rural and remote areas. The fact of the matter is that the working draft is so all-encompassingly inclusive.

To be fair to the author of the working draft, we must not fail to appreciate the highly challenging nature and also the enormity and stupendity of the task considering that intricate diversities and diverse intricacies do exist within the larger group of persons with disabilities. It was no mean task; and, yet executed with remarkable sensitivity and alacrity.

I am afraid the Govt. may not accept this kind of a draft in toto; it nevertheless, will continue to have an immensely educative value.

I feel that we need to critique this brilliantly conceived working draft with the objectivity and openness that it merits keeping in mind our  best interests as persons with disabilities, and  putting aside our egos to the extent possible. Such critique should invariably be constructive and in good taste. If some people still choose not to eschew condemnatory language, all I wish to say is this: Just come up with an alternative and matching draft so that one is able to compare and contrast and come to a certain view in respect of the matter.

Well done, amita, well done Nalsar team, well done Sudhaji and the new law committee!

Best regards, 

Prasanna Kumar Pincha



Memorandum on Disability Code

The Background

In the explanatory note to the Working Draft we had communicated to the Committee that in our opinion in order to do full justice to the Disability Rights Authority in terms of putting down its power and responsibilities in full detail it would be appropriate if the Authority was established under a dedicated statute of its own, instead of being made to tag along with the Rights statute. We had pointed out that we felt cramped for space in working out the norms by which representation to the Authority should be worked out and accountability of members obtained. It was due to this substantive constraint along with the lack of time that prevented us from working out the linkages between the DRA and other Authorities in the disability field such as the National Trust and the Rehabilitation Council of India.

Dedicated Legislations

Since we reached the opinion that the newly established DRA should have its own legislation we also concluded that the National Trust and the RCI should have their own legislations which should spell out the specific tasks each of those authorities should carry out to implement the rights recognized in the New Rights for Persons with Disabilities Act. The National Trust should be the authority which addresses the issue of multiple discrimination and be mandated to proactively formulate policies and programs by which to ensure the equality and non discrimination of persons with disabilities who are so disadvantaged and the RCI could work on HRD. The composition and powers and functions of the three bodies should be so created that it ensures convergence of operation.

Transitory Measures

The proposed new law recognizes the paradigm of legal capacity with support. It also recognizes the right to life, liberty and integrity of all persons with disabilities. The recognition of these rights requires a re-examination of the Mental Health Act. Even if it is accepted that community living and no force are what is required for all; it is necessary to ask what should be done with the existing institutions and the inmates housed in them. The process of dismantling cannot be done without creating alternative services and there is a need to make a transit legislation which addresses this interim situation. The reason for making the transit legislation comes from the main law but to allow coherent operation and efficient implementation of these transitory measures it is better that they are contained in a separate legislation.

Demands for Comprehensive Legislation and Protection of Interests of Most Marginalized

The Committee and consequently the legal consultant has been faced with two demands: one, seeking a comprehensive all inclusive legislation; and the other asking that the interests of the most marginalized persons with disabilities should not be compromised and side-lined. The reason for seeking a comprehensive legislation as we understand is to ensure convergence in the operation of various authorities in the field and to make for more effective implementation. Whilst the group asserting the interest of the marginalized accepts the need for convergence, it fears that if such convergence is obtained in one comprehensive legislation, which absorbs all authorities then the voices of the more organized groups could drown their concerns.

Convergence in Disability Code

It is in the wake of these equally valid concerns that it was suggested that a Disability Code may be formulated which could be a legally accepted and efficient way of bringing convergence along with accommodating difference. The difference between a Code and multiple legislations in a field is that the Code has a common philosophy; common grammar and a concerted effort to ensure that each part fits into a cohesive whole. Thus for example there are number of legislations on children which occupy the field today but they do not make a Children Code because the cohesiveness of philosophy, grammar and the convergence between authorities is absent.

The difference between a Code with multiple legislations and a single comprehensive legislation is that a Code with multiple legislations allows each area to obtain the detailed and dedicated attention it requires. The Companies Act; the Income Tax Act are examples of legislations which are comprehensive but whose very comprehensiveness becomes a barrier to their efficient implementation. A Code with multiple legislations makes it easier to undertake capacity building and awareness raising of the law and it ensures that the interests of the marginalized groups are not submerged in the bulk of a large legislation.

Centre For Disability Studies Nalsar

How families and coteries are ruining disabled sports in India

The disability sports sector in India seems to be in gross disarray with the administration of the sector in the stranglehold of a coterie of people who seem to have no interest in either the disabled or in sports. National disabled sporting federations seem to be run like mom-and-pop outfits with hardly any national character.Yet, not only does the sports ministry seem blind to such obvious  mismanagement, it  seems to be actively funding and perpetuating these outfits shelling out public money in crores every year to these organisations in the name of promoting sports for the disabled.

The rot seems to start right from the apex body of disability sports, the Paralympic Committee of India (PCI). The PCI is headed by the president Ratan Singh whose son Amar Singh is the vice-president.  Amar Singh’s son, Raghavendra Singh is an escort or so-called professional masseuse for disabled sports teams. He is too young with no professional qualification to be a sports masseur. Yet, he gets selected, despite qualified persons in sports medicine with  professional training in sports massage being  available, says a disabled sportsperson on conditions of anonymity. Sportspersons are scared of speaking out against the office bearers who have a vice-like grip over their sporting  careers, a threat they seem to use to good  effect in keeping them from protesting.

When contacted, Ratan Singh admitted to the problem of office bearers signing up as escorts and managers.  “Office bearers accompany teams as they can sort out any problem easily. I can do little about this. But as you can see, my son and I are not signed up for any team. My grandson is there for being a qualified masseuse. I did not make the selection,” said Singh.

Every single office bearer of PCI has listed himself as manager or escort with various teams accompanying them to countries   like the US, Germany, Malaysia, Taiwan, Australia, Spain and so on. KR Shankar Iyer, the treasurer of PCI, is listed as an escort for the athletics and volleyball teams and manager for the wheelchair fencing team. CV Raghunath,
administrator of PCI, is listed as an escort for athletics, volleyball and the powerlifting teams. M Mahadev, the secretary of the PCI, is listed to accompany the athletics and volleyball teams.

The office bearers of national federations for each sport do what is done in PCI, which is to list themselves as escorts and managers or appoint themselves as the coach and take their wives along as escorts. Quite understandably, these so-called coaches, managers and escorts are of little help to the disabled sportspeople when they go abroad as they are allegedly too busy on jaunts and sightseeing with their wives and  friends who accompany them as team escorts.  Each so-called national federation is single-city based, filled with people from the same city and no national representation. For instance, powerlifting is run from Nagpur, swimming from Gwalior and athletics from Bangalore. The PCI, the overarching national body for all disability sports is controlled by a bunch of people in Bangalore.

The selection of sportspersons from all over the country for different sports is decided by small coteries of people of one city and allegations of irregularities in selection are common. It is the sportspersons who suffer the consequences of such mismanagement. Last month, the athletics team that was supposed to be in Germany for an international meet could not go as those responsible did not apply for the visa in time.

Most teams don’t even have basic sports equipment such as the swimming team not have approved swimming costumes or the table tennis team does not have wheelchairs.

Despite these malpractices being pretty obvious in the team lists for each sport submitted by PCI to the ministry as Long Term Development Plan 2010, the sports ministry seems oblivious to it and the allocation to these federations has been rising steadily every year going from about Rs 10 lakh in 2005 to over Rs 5 crore in 2010.

(Source: Long  Term Development Plan 2010 submitted by PCI to sports  ministry)

List of office bearers of various sports

ATHLETICS

• Raghavendra Singh, escort: Grandson of PCI president, Ratan Singh and son of Amar Singh, PCI vice-president
• M Mahadev, team manager: Secretary of PCI
• David Premnath, coach: General secretary of Wheelchair Basketball Federation of India
• CV Raghunath, escort: Administrator of PCI
• Diana Joyline D’Souza, escort: Was personal secretary to PCI president
• KR Shankar, escort: Treasurer of PCI

SWIMMING

• VK Dabas, coach: Secretary of Paralympic Swimming Federation of India, also runs Paralympic Committee of Madhya Pradesh
• Saroj Dabas, escort: Wife of VK Dabas
• Suresh Kalra, escort: President of PSFI
• Lalit Gupta, escort: Vice-president of PSFI

VOLLEYBALL

• H Chandrashekar, cpach: Secretary of Volleyball Federation
• M Mahadev, escort: Secretary of PCI
• Chandrashekar, escort: Joint secretary of PCI

WHEELCHAIR FENCING

KR Shankar Iyer, manager: Treasurer of PCI

POWERLIFTING

• Vijay B Munishwar, coach: President of Paralympic Powerlifting Federation and also runs Maharashtra State Paralympic Association
• Deepali Munishwar, escort: Wife of Munishwar
• CV Raghunath, escort: Administrator of PCI

TABLE TENNIS

• R Murali, coach: Secretary of Paralympic TT Federation
• Gopal Babu, escort: Member of executive committee, PTTFI
• Shashikala Babu, escort: Wife of Gopal Babu
• Satyanarayana, manager: President of PTTFI

Disability and Census of 2011

Counting the “invisible” children of Mother India.

While the current focus of political debate is on ‘caste and census,’ there is another important aspect that deserves attention. This concerns disability.  For decades after our independence, there was no effort to actually count how many of us have any disability. There were estimates-informed or otherwise- but no factual figures. All our  government’s plans and budgets, rules and regulations, proclamations and posturing were built upon shaky foundations. A new Ministry was created, staffed and has been operating for several decades on that basis. It seemed to suit every one, except the millions who were thus rendered ‘invisible’. This lasted for 54 years. But, despite their  ‘invisibility,’ the disabled and the NGOs dealing with disability made progress on the ground.

Let me illustrate with an example. There was no government or non-government organisation looking after the needs of children with cerebral palsy, till a young mother of a child with cerebral palsy set up the very first Spastics Society of India, Mumbai (now known as ADAPT-Able Disabled All People Together)) in 1972. The handful of children included her own daughter. Dr. Mithu Alur, our Chairperson, had thus created a unique institution, offering all facilities under one roof, including diagnosis, physiotherapy, physical aids, schooling, parental counselling, etc. Over time, these services also came to include research, teachers training, admission of older children in “normal” schools and colleges, job-oriented training and placements and so on. This model is now replicated in 18 States. Almost all the organisers have themselves been trained at Mumbai. These NGOs operate independently, while forming a Regional Alliance, constantly coordinating, cooperating and learning from one another.

During preparations for the Census of 2001, several NGOs (including us) approached the Census Commission with the request that they should also count the disabled in our country. Obvious arguments were put forward. Approaches were also made through the concerned departments of the Government. Unfortunately, nothing worked; we were simply told that the disabled could not be included. The NGOs were persistent; the matter was taken to the political level. Eventually, it was decided that the Census would include, for the very first time, a counting of the disabled. However, this historic decision was taken at a very late stage, in the face of consistent opposition by the Census Establishment. Perhaps, their subsequent actions were reluctant and grudging. Perhaps, there was not enough time for the necessary preparations. It is also possible that, despite their best efforts, framing of appropriate questions, their translation into the required languages, training of the enumerators etc. left much to be desired. For all these reasons, the results of the Census 2001 were deeply disappointing for the disability movement.

For example, the Census of 2001 concluded that there were only 2.13 % or 21 million Indians with any kind of disability. This was a fraction of the estimates by most experts. This has since been amply proved by a World Bank report of 2007. This report was “prepared at the request of the Government of India”. In fact, it acknowledges “the guidance of officials of the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment, guidance provided by an inter-ministerial Technical Advisory Group set up for the work by MSJE and consisting of representatives from the Ministries of Health, Labour, Human Resource Development and Rural development, as well as an NGO representative.” Similarly, it acknowledges the help of officials in several States including Rajasthan, Karnataka, Orissa, Uttar Pradesh and Tamil Nadu. In short, the World Bank Team had the full backing and support of the Government of India and many State governments. The report is entitled ‘People with Disabilities in India: From Commitments to Outcomes’. It concludes: “While estimates vary, there is growing evidence that people with disabilities comprise between 4 and 8 per cent of the India population (around 40-90 million individuals)”

Obviously, there is a vast difference between 2.13 per cent or 21 million ‘counted’ by the Census of India, and 4-8 per cent or 40-90 million estimated by the World Bank team. Several NGOs, including ADAPT, have been interacting with the Census Commission, individually or in groups. The Commissioner, Dr. C. Chandramauli, has been positive and open-minded. In a recent letter to him, based on our own experience, and consultations with our regional partners and other experts, we have made a number of recommendations. These take into account the Commission’s constraints of space and format, the work already done, and recommendations made by others in the disability movement, like a Delhi-based group which had also held wide consultations. For example, along with the Delhi group, we have endorsed the inclusion of four types of disability in seeing, hearing, speech and movement, repeated from the 2001 census. We have also endorsed the recommended inclusion of Multiple Disability and Mental Retardation. But, since the latter expression is no longer used, we propose “Remembering and Concentration” instead. Thus, there is already an agreement on the types of disability.

Equally important is the framing of questions under each type. Questions must be activity related; these must also be relevant to our circumstances; only then can these elicit accurate responses. For example, the question suggested by us on speech is: “Do you have difficulty in speaking in your usual language?” The latter language is included because, in the course of a research study with UNICEF involving 31,000 children, we had found that children who had migrated out of their home states had a linguistic problem, which may be reflected as a speech problem. We have also submitted Hindi translations of these easy-to- understand questions to demonstrate that similar translations in other languages could be equally easy and understandable. Contrary to speculations, there is thus a growing meeting of minds between the Census Commission, on the one hand, and several sections of the disability movement, on the other. Thus, we can hope that the Census of 2011 will finally be able to give us a correct count of the disabled in our country, making them truly visible.

By Kamal Bakshi
(A former ambassador, and Vice-Chairperson of ADAPT, Mumbai.)

© Copyright 2000 – 2009 The Hindu

Disability law: Hunger strike called off

After the Centre partially conceded their demands, a group of disabled people on Wednesday called off their hunger strike held to protest against their poor representation on a committee which is drafting a new law to protect their rights.  Javed Abidi, convenor of the Disabled Rights Group, said the strike had been called off after the Centre’s positive response.

A S Narayanan, secretary of the National Association of the Deaf, told The Indian Express through a translator that Gopal Reddy, personal secretary to Social Justice and Empowerment Minister Mukul Wasnik, had confirmed that six more people would be added to the committee, of whom three were disabled. This would bring the total number of disabled people on the committee to six.  Following pressure from various disabled groups, the Social Justice And Empowerment Ministry had formed a committee in April to draft a new legislation, reflecting the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, to replace the Disability Act, 1995. The first meeting of the committee will be held on Thursday.

Disability activists are looking for three main changes to the Act.

VINAY SITAPATI
Indian Express

Disabled people plan hunger strike in Delhi for rights law

A group of disabled people will begin an indefinite hunger strike from Wednesday outside the Shastri Bhawan, which houses many central government ministries, to protest their poor representation on a committee drafting a new law protecting their rights.

Following pressure from various disabled groups, the social justice and empowerment ministry in April ormed a committee to draft new legislation, reflecting the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, to replace the Disability Act, 1995.

The first meeting of the committee will be held June 10.

“The government has overlooked the basic tenet of the convention and the bedrock of the disability rights movement – ‘Nothing about us, Without us’. The 27-member committee appointed by the government has only three people with disabilities,” said Javed Abidi, convener of Disabled Rights Group.

A group of disabled people also met Social Justice and Empowerment Minister Mukul Wasnik May 26, demanding an increase in the number of disabled people in the committee, he said.

“We will sit on indefinite hunger strike till our demands are accepted,” Abidi added.

Enabling the disabled

With sensitised education for the disabled high on Human Resource Development Minister Kapil Sibal’s agenda, all eyes are on the 2011 Census which will provide crucial statistics on the number of disabled Indians and what disability they suffer from. But a raging dispute has broken out within the disability sector about the exact question in the Census questionnaire and Census Commissioner Dr C Chandramouli is being lobbied by different groups.  World over, asking the right question has proven the key to getting accurate disability figures. According to a 2009 World Bank Report, in countries which ask a simple yes/no question, disability statistics range from 0.5 per cent of the total population (Nigeria) to 3.8 per cent (Ethiopia).  In countries which list the types of conditions, the number is only slightly higher. But in countries which ask specific activity-related questions (for instance: do you have trouble walking/ remembering?), disability statistics range from 10 per cent (Poland) to 19.2 per cent (United States) of the country’s entire population. The more specific the question, the more likely it is to yield a higher percentage of disabled people.

The Indian Census asked a question on disability for the first time in 2001 (see box). Based on this question, the Census Commissioner estimated that 2.13 per cent of the population, or roughly 25 million Indians, were disabled.  But this  number has been criticised for being too low. Javed Abidi, a disability activist and the head of National Centre for Promotion of Employment for Disabled People (NCPEDP), says the low number is because the question in the 2011 Census merely listed the type of conditions, which world over have excluded many disabled people. He adds that the Census enumerators in 2001 were not sensitive. “In fact, they did not even identify me as disabled,” he  complains.

Mithu Alur, founder of Able Disable All People Together (ADAPT, formerly Spastic Society of India) says when she  spoke to Chandramouli, “he admitted that the 2001 data for the disabled was not robust, as they had very little time”.  But while there is agreement on the need for a better question in the 2011 census, agreeing on the details has run into rough weather. Two drafts have emerged amongst the competing NGOs, each accusing the other of trying to hog the limelight.  All are agreed that the new question on disability must be activity-based (like in the US and Poland), but there is a dispute about what the exact question will be.

The first draft is led by a group that includes Abidi. This draft was the result of a day-long roundtable here on March 31,
co-organised by Abidi, and attended by “representatives from 22 states and the Census Commissioner himself”, according to him.

The second draft has been formulated by ADAPT. Alur says these questions are based on a widely accepted, UN-approved standard, called the Washington Group on Disability Statistics (see box). These questions are slightly different from the March 31 model. Alur says her suggestions “are more explanatory and inclusive”.

Alur charges Abidi with not including her NGO in the March 31 deliberative process, and of hijacking the disability agenda. Abidi strongly denies this allegation. “I sent an email to Dr Alur inviting her to the meeting. She did not come, but emailed me the sample questions that she suggested,” says Abidi. “Her questions were raised before the forum, and rejected.” Alur denies this, saying it was a general email which did not “contain any details of the meeting”.  Abidi feels ADAPT’s sample questions are too “western” and unsuitable for Indian conditions. One of the questions the ADAPT wants to ask is “do you have difficulty in walking or climbing stairs”. “Half  of Vasant Kunj will say yes to that question,” says Abidi.

Both Alur and Abidi have a personal stake. Abidi is wheelchair-bound. Alur’s daughter Malini was diagnosed very early with cerebral palsy. Both groups had joined hands to demand amendments to the Right to Education Act in August 2009 to make it disabled friendly.

Regardless of which version finally makes it to the Census questionnaire, disability activists say versions are  improvements from the 2001 Census question as they are more descriptive, and expand the word “mental” in the 2001 question to involve specific forms of mental illness.  Chandramouli could not be contacted by phone. Alur says he has given disability activists till April-end to provide suggestions.

Vinay Sitapati
Indian Express New Delhi : Wednesday, Apr 28, 2010

Manmohan promises disabled-friendly laws

FIGHTING FOR THEIR RIGHTS: Physically challenged persons, under the banner of the National Platform for the Rights of the Disabled and led by CPI(M) leader Brinda Karat, march on Parliament Street in New Delhi on Tuesday to press their demands. Photo: V. Sudhersan

Prime Minister Manmohan Singh on Tuesday said the government was in favour of amending the laws, if need be, to make them more disabled-friendly. He gave this assurance to a delegation of the differently-abled persons who met him in Parliament. The delegation was led by CPI (M) MP Brinda Karat.  “The Prime Minister was extremely sympathetic towards the demands of the disabled persons and said their demands were genuine,” Ms. Karat said. Dr. Singh assured the delegation of changing the laws to make them disabled-friendly, if necessary. The Prime Minister interacted with the members of the delegations and enquired about their problems. Talking to The Hindu, Ms. Karat said this was the first time that a delegation of differently-abled persons had visited Parliament House. “It was pointed out to the Parliament staff that there was only one gate (Gate no 9) in Parliament House for the physically disabled people and this was far away from the main entrance,” Ms. Karat said. The delegation also met the Union Minister for Social Justice and Empowerment Mukul Wasnik who told them that the government was finalising a new law for the disabled that would replace the existing law.

Earlier, a large number of people with different forms of disabilities marched to Parliament House to demand a better deal. Marching under the banner, ‘National Platform for the Rights of Disabled Persons,’ the people highlighted the plight of the economically and socially disadvantaged among the disabled, the poor, and the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes. “The basic issue is that of the approach of the government and we must request you to consider our demands not as an act of charity but as fulfilment of entitlements and rights as equal citizens of India. India is a signatory to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the persons with Disabilities which enjoins the government to ensure minimum rights and livelihood to disabled citizens,” the marchers said in a memorandum submitted to the Prime Minister. The demands include a comprehensive social security system for all persons with disabilities and their families including the Antyodaya cards, free health care for disabled persons, amendments to the Right to Education Act to make provision for disabled teachers and professional and identification of jobs for the disabled immediately with annual special recruitment drives each year.

Besides setting up a separate Ministry for disability affairs, the memorandum also sought issuance of a universally valid identity card and replacing the current Persons with Disabilities Act (1995) in consonance with the provisions of the U.N. Convention and harmonising other laws, the disabled persons also wanted proper enumeration of the persons with disabilities. The organisations that participated in the march included the Paschimbanga Rajya Pratibandhi Samaiilani, the Differently Abled Persons Welfare Federation of Thiruvananthapuram, the Karnataka Rajya Angavikalara Mattu Palakara Okkota, the Jharkhand Vikalanga Morcha, the Tamil Nadu Association for the Rights of all types of Disabled and Caregivers and the Vibhinna Prathiba Vanthula Jakkula Vedika of Andhra Pradesh.

The Hindu

M.S.J.E. considering a new law over amendments, Wasnik tells D.R.G.

p>D.N.I.S. News Network, India: In what can be termed as a big step forward for the Indian disability sector, Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment (M.S.J.E.) is finally considering the option of going in for a brand new law based on U.N.C.R.P.D. as opposed to their earlier stand on going in for amendments to the archaic Disability Act of 1995. This was disclosed by Minister M.S.J.E., Mukul Wasnik in a meeting with a delegation of Disabled Rights Group (D.R.G.) led by Convenor Javed Abidi on February 9.  Although it was clear that Wasnik was still mulling the option, he said that he was “open to the idea” of going in for a new law. He had maintained a similar position in August when the D.R.G. delegation met him. However, this is the first time Wasnik has publicly spoken about a new law. He also talked about the possibility of going in for a new law in a meeting with the Parliamentary Committee on Social Justice on February 8.

Wasnik refuted the rumour that M.S.J.E. is going to place the Amendments Bill in the coming Budget Session. He hinted that the Ministry may consider going in for more consultations on the issue of a new law.  Abidi once again reiterated the unanimous demand of the disability sector for a new law that was observed in the National Consultation held by National Centre for Promotion of Employment for Disabled People (N.C.P.E.D.P.) and the North Zone Consultation thereafter.  The D.R.G. delegation consisted of Arun Rao, Executive Director, The Deaf Way Foundation; A. S. Narayanan, Secretary, N.A.D.; Dr. Achal Bhagat, Director, Sarthak; G. Syamala, Executive Director, A.A.D.I.; J. P. Gadkari, President, Parivaar; Radhika Alkazi, Managing Trustee, A.A.S.T.H.A.; Dr. Shanti Auluck, Director, Muskaan; and Vandana Bedi, Consultant, Disability and Development.

It may be mentioned that N.C.P.E.D.P. and D.R.G. are going ahead with their Zonal Consultations, as well as the drafting of the new law by the D.R.G. Core Group as planned.

DNIS, 15th Feb 2010

Nasscom to start job portal for aspirants with disabilities

Deepa Kurup

It will issue advisories on working towards accessibility

BANGALORE: Soon, the IT sector’s commitment to inclusiveness towards the disability sector will be etched in cyberspace. Industry trade body Nasscom (National Association of Software and Services Companies) will launch a dedicated portal that will facilitate recruitment for persons with disability by creating a repository of applicants, available skill-sets and potential recruiters.  This was one of the key agendas at the first-ever meeting of the newly constituted Nasscom disability advisory group. Disability rights activists, who celebrated the creation of this 12-member group last week, are now ecstatic to see that the group — comprising Nasscom, industry members and civil society groups — means business.

Info kits

Speaking to The Hindu, the group’s chairperson Pradeep Gupta said that the measures would work towards increasing employability for persons with disabilities. Further, the group decided that informative kits, prepared by the National Centre for Promotion of Employment for Disabled People (NCPEDP), would be circulated among Nasscom members to create awareness on existing initiatives. “ICT firms have their heart in the right place. Now, we will work towards getting the brain part right. There is no lack of will, but issues like accessibility (technical and physical) may not have been thought about. Our aim will be to build that awareness,” Mr. Gupta said. The group, with a tenure of two years, decided that Nasscom would issue advisories to its member companies. These advisories would be on physical accessibility (in accordance with guidelines submitted by NCPEDP on facilities such as ramps or lifts) and software or technical accessibility.  It would focus on compliance of websites and electronic products with international standards.  Javed Abidi, director of NCPEDP, believes that the creation of an industry forum can make an impact. Internationally, it is mandated that websites be WCAG. 2.0 Compliant (an international standard that ensures websites are disabled-friendly) and electronic goods are disability-friendly. “What has held us behind?” he asked.

Double standards

Today, a year after the Union Government issued guidelines that all websites be disabled-friendly, only one of the 5,000 sites has complied, he said. “Even private Indian firms that ensure disability-friendliness while creating or servicing goods for the international market have for long practised double standards when it comes to domestic products such as mobile phones, microwaves or even ATMs. If this group can achieve that transition it will be worthwhile.” While this is not a diktat to companies, it will at least create awareness and sensitivity in the private sector. Nasscom president Som Mittal said that the group would work towards leveraging technologies to skill people who are differently-abled, so they could find jobs and employability in various sectors. “Accessibility can be built into the design. But the real challenge will be to work towards building technology that can facilitate better access and inclusivity. Also, several companies already have inclusive programmes, for employment and training, and we hope other companies will benefit from their learning through this forum,” Mr. Mittal said.

The Hindu

Nasscom’s disabled-friendly initiative gets ecstatic welcome

Ramya Kannan

CHENNAI:

Earlier this week, through the contemporary media for newsbreaks, @javed_abidi tweeted about the constitution of Nasscom’s disability advisory group (DAG). Mr. Abidi, a vociferous campaigner for the rights of the disabled in the country, could scarcely contain his excitement. “It is phenomenal,” he said later, over telephone. “In fact, I think the word should be ‘historic’. We have been lobbying with the Nasscom for more than one-and-a-half years now. It is good to see they have finally understood the issue of disability and its connect with IT.” The disability sector is ecstatic with the DAG finally put in place. It is headed by Pradeep Gupta of Cyber Media, who has been sensitive to the requirements of the disabled. Ten members from the disability and IT sectors and a couple of representatives from the Nasscom Foundation, including Som Mittal, are part of the DAG. They are scheduled to meet on Monday. In using technology, there are a number of issues disabled users face which others cannot even perceive. Text size, contrast and audio-video formats, and assistive devices are considerations. “The group’s agenda is to focus on accessibility, employability and assistive technologies,” said Nasscom Foundation CEO Rufina Fernandes. The aim is also to leverage the members’ strengths to translate policy into tangible action. “We already have members who, as part of the industry, have been at the forefront of disabled-friendly initiatives,” Ms. Fernandes said. Besides more access, both to websites and technology, the broader goals of advocacy and imparting skills that facilitate employability will be pursued.

Easy Websites

Web Content Access Guidelines (WCAG) were evolved to make the worldwide web more accessible to all. Working on the principle, as Tim Berners-Lee, Director, World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) and inventor of the WWW, put it: “The power of the web is in its universality. Access by every one regardless of disability is an essential aspect.” The WCAG drew up the initial guidelines for site developers and web designers that would take care of the needs of older users and people with disability. The guidelines focus on aspects that will make websites easy for all, not merely special groups, to access. WCAG 1.0 claims that following the guidelines “will also make Web content more available to all users, whatever user agent they use [e.g., desktop browser, voice browser, mobile phone and automobile-based personal computer] or constraints they may be operating under [noisy surroundings, under or over-illuminated rooms, in a hands-free environment]. Following these guidelines will also help people find information on the Web more quickly.” In December 2008, W3C announced a new set of standards, WCAG 2.0. It is more broadly applicable to different technologies and has clearer criteria, and tools available to tell if your design fits the mould. Apart from increasing the font size, providing higher contrasts and incorporating text into voice components on any site, there is the need to develop hardware (such as special keyboards) and software with local customisation to benefit a large number of disabled users and facilitate their employability.

© Copyright 2000 – 2009 The Hindu

Simpler disability rule

New Delhi, Jan. 14: The government has decided to simplify the process of issuing disability certificates through a slew of steps that would among other things relieve disadvantaged people in rural areas of the trouble of making long, “cumbersome” trips.  The social justice ministry has decided to let doctors at primary health centres issue disability certificates to those with visible handicaps such as blindness, amputations and paralysis of limbs. At present, a person with disabilities has to travel to district headquarters to get such a certificate from a medical board comprising a civil surgeon and an expert on disability.  Ministry sources said the plan would be of great help to the country’s 2.19 crore disabled, including those with mental illnesses, who make up 2.13 per cent of India’s population. The disability certificate is crucial for a disadvantaged person as it makes him or her eligible to apply for facilities, concessions and benefits under schemes of governments or non-government organisations.

“Disabled people, especially those from rural areas, had been finding it very difficult to get a disability certificate as they have to make trips to district headquarters. It has come to our notice that many disabled people in rural areas have been deciding not to get the certificate because of the cumbersome process involved. Hence we have decided to simplify the procedure,” said an official with the social justice ministry.  But those with complicated disabilities not easily discernible and which need to be assessed scientifically will still have to get the certificate from the district medical boards.  These include non-visible locomotor disabilities, cerebral palsy, hearing impairment, low vision, mental retardation, autism and mental illnesses. “Certain disabilities like hearing problems and autism cannot be assessed by a general physician. They (people with such disabilities) will have to go and get their problems certified by doctors at higher levels,” the official said.

But even in the case of people with such non-apparent disabilities the government has decided to make the process of getting a disability certificate easier.  It has decided to fix particular days in a week or month for issuing the certificates. It has also decided to hold camps for issuing the certificates at the taluka or block level.  The government is also planning to fix a time frame for issuing the certificates once an application is submitted with the district medical board.  In case the board does not have a government psychiatrist or a clinical psychologist or a paediatrician, it will be able to use the service of a private practitioner.  The government has decided to make it the responsibility of principals/headmasters of schools to arrange for disability certificates for students with disabilities. Under the new plan, the district medical board has to visit a school for evaluation of a student’s disability on the written request of the school’s authorities.

While the government’s move has come in for praise, many NGO activists voiced fears that it could lead to “massive corruption”.

The Telegraph, Calcutta